Re:I'll take content over "hip-looking, style-lade
on
Web Design Garage
·
· Score: 1
Since when did this book advocate content-devoided sites? Were you expecting some info on how to create good content? Do you expect books to cover every topic slightly related to the core topic? Are you assuming that anyone who reads this book must not be interesting in content?
I presume that you're talking about vertical alignment? If you use a table in strict mode, I think you will still find it's a problem.
If vertical alignment is important, you can always use a small bit of JS to do the job.
It is a pain sometimes. But you'd have to be joking to think that I'd ever go back to using tables'n'tag soup for presentation.
Besides, a flawed implimetation of a flawed spec is much worse and much harder to deal with than a properly implimented, flawed spec.
Quirks mode. Both IE and Firefox have it. IE7 would have the same thing. And it's not that hard to go around the web and see what bugs people rely on as a work-around for other bugs. They just have to make sure that if they fix one bug, that they fix other bugs that depend on it. Surely MS are not so incompetent that they can't manage to do this.
The width thing does makes sense. It depends on how you look at it. If you have a large CMS, and you have set a max embedded image width, then changing the padding or border can end up affecting the content because the width has changed. Many of us think about the content width when designing. For a small site, the content width may not matter so much, but for a large CMS, it's very important.
They should have had the option to define the outer or innner box width/height from the start. So is a flaw, but so would have been IE's way of doing it.
Since when can you run your average piece of fiber cable through a sliding door, then still be able to close the door and not damage the cable? Same goes for windows, and many other things.
Not all of us are able to have the perfect setup when it comes to cabling/wiring.
Any decent photographer would disagree with that. A black and white film is good for the same qualities that make a black and white photo good. And composing to make a good black and white shot isn't nessesarly going to make a good color shot, and visa versa.
I think it's a much better improvment and even looks better. I hate the silly side-drawer. I can't see the point of having a drawer if it's going to left open all the time (kinda like a real drawer, really). And I'm sure if you don't want it, you can hide it. As for the space, it makes sence. It looks weird, and gives the wrong message by having all those button hanging over the folder area, when they only perform functions on the main part. I'm also not sure what you mean by it's been dumbed-down. I'm sure you can still add buttons etc. if that's what you mean.
The big different is that therse guys are selling this software. Many people don't see a moral problem with downloading illegal copies of things for personal use if they would never otherwise have paid for it. Selling it to other for a profit is quite different.
Some people have a problem with the way the RIAA is going about it's lawsuits; getting new laws past, and erroding people's privacy because it makes it easier for them to sue people.
Others have a problems with the penalties the RIAA is giving, such as sending a kid away to jail for a few years, simply because they setup a server. Many people consider that too harsh, and that a small fine would have stopped and prevented this guy from making the same mistake again.
Besides, the biggest flaw in your argument is that you assume that slashdot is one big person, dispite your little discalimer. What makes you think that it's the same majority that are posting these hypercritical opinions?
Sorry, I meant that the judge hasn't charged him with anything. But yes, you are right. I don't think there is much chance of Think Secret winning this case. And I have to say, he did have it comming. I don't think he needs to be made to pay for damages though.
The judge is right. Since when is knowing if the next iPod mini will have a colour screen any of the public's business? AFAIK, the majority of what Think Secret reports are not to do with Apple knowingly shipping faulty goods or anything of such nature. Your very long, well written post entirly misses the point.
It has even been quoted in one of the first few comments.
This isn't a case of whistle-blowing--where Apple has done something that the public should know about. I suspect you'd get the same results in Brazil.
Besides, AFAIK, he isn't being procecuted or silenced. He's been asked to reveal his sources, because there is good reason to believe they are breaking the law by revealing the info to him.
What do NDAs have to do with the DMCA; a very controversial piece of law. Are you saying that NDAs are as bad as the DMCA, that they have major abuse potential, that all NDAs should be abolished?
AFAIK, Think Secret haven't broken any laws, or atleast, they are not being charged with anything. All that has happened is that they must give their sources.
If someone tells you something that they shouldn't have told you (because they would be violating their NDA), but fails to tell you that they are violating their NDA, does that make you a criminal for reporting it?
Not sure, but it hardly matters, because once you had be informed that they may have been violating their NDA, then, although you might not have commited a crime, you must cooperate with the investigation. And in this case, that means disclosing his sources.
Look at it this way. If you had bought something from someone, and had then been told by someone that they were stolen goods, you would then be breaking the law if you refused to tell the police who you bought it from, but not for actually buying the goods.
Oh you know this for a fact, do you? For all we know, the "leaker" doesn't even work for Apple. Apple may force everyone at Apple to sign an NDA, but Apple doesn't manufacture anything. For all we know, the leaker works in Taiwan and never signed an NDA.
Well, obviously, this is the whole point in having the court, isn't it? To find out these things. It's not as if there isn't sufficeint evidence to presume that someone has broken an NDA, is it?
Of course, all of us with 1001 personal websites don't have to keep our stuff up to date. You only have to keep stuff up to date if:
1> You are selling stuff from your website
2> Someone calls to your attention that said site is out of date.
Even then. I think you'd only risk a fine depending on the type of business. In terms of the resturant, the commitment is pretty much made once you look at the menu on the site and decide to go there. Once you've taken the time to drive there and get seated, then most people would consider it a hassle to find another place to dine at once they discover the prices are incorrect, because it's only a meal. Therefore they just stay, but feel tricked.
If you were selling cars OTOH, you might not get fined, because if someone takes the time to drive down there and have a look at the cars, they're not really expected to commit to buying a car in the first place.
BTW. NZ$3000 is probably around US$1700. A slap on the wrist, really.
No. Programming is a science most of the time. Not many scientists are like Einstein, either. Put a large group of average scientists in a room, and that doesn't mean they would have come up with the theory of relativity. But does that make Einstein an artist? How about Pythagoras?
If what you are doing has a precise purpose and goal, then it falls into the relms of design/science/engineering/etc.
Eliminating competition by outlawing it, is statism, not socialism. And capitalists will obviously use the state to their benefit if they can, due to the competitive nature of capitalism. Capitalism will only innovate when it is the easiest way to compete. There is nothing about capitalism that makes it an inherently innovative system.
The proof of this should be quite obvious if you look at the US; laws such as the DMCA, and all the things going on with the RIAA etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Since when did this book advocate content-devoided sites? Were you expecting some info on how to create good content? Do you expect books to cover every topic slightly related to the core topic? Are you assuming that anyone who reads this book must not be interesting in content?
If vertical alignment is important, you can always use a small bit of JS to do the job.
It is a pain sometimes. But you'd have to be joking to think that I'd ever go back to using tables'n'tag soup for presentation.
Besides, a flawed implimetation of a flawed spec is much worse and much harder to deal with than a properly implimented, flawed spec.
Quirks mode. Both IE and Firefox have it. IE7 would have the same thing. And it's not that hard to go around the web and see what bugs people rely on as a work-around for other bugs. They just have to make sure that if they fix one bug, that they fix other bugs that depend on it. Surely MS are not so incompetent that they can't manage to do this.
And web designers spend hours on a single in Photoshop, then convert it to a CSS layout to be applied to 100's of pages.
Perhaps you meant print designers or multimedia artists when you said designers?
They should have had the option to define the outer or innner box width/height from the start. So is a flaw, but so would have been IE's way of doing it.
Like Slashdot, and just about every other website on the net?
Never. But I do have an Ethernet cable running out a window, and now I can't close the damn thing.
Not all of us are able to have the perfect setup when it comes to cabling/wiring.
How about you tell us, rather than just polishing your n00b?
Any decent photographer would disagree with that. A black and white film is good for the same qualities that make a black and white photo good. And composing to make a good black and white shot isn't nessesarly going to make a good color shot, and visa versa.
I think it's a much better improvment and even looks better. I hate the silly side-drawer. I can't see the point of having a drawer if it's going to left open all the time (kinda like a real drawer, really). And I'm sure if you don't want it, you can hide it. As for the space, it makes sence. It looks weird, and gives the wrong message by having all those button hanging over the folder area, when they only perform functions on the main part. I'm also not sure what you mean by it's been dumbed-down. I'm sure you can still add buttons etc. if that's what you mean.
Some people have a problem with the way the RIAA is going about it's lawsuits; getting new laws past, and erroding people's privacy because it makes it easier for them to sue people.
Others have a problems with the penalties the RIAA is giving, such as sending a kid away to jail for a few years, simply because they setup a server. Many people consider that too harsh, and that a small fine would have stopped and prevented this guy from making the same mistake again.
Besides, the biggest flaw in your argument is that you assume that slashdot is one big person, dispite your little discalimer. What makes you think that it's the same majority that are posting these hypercritical opinions?
What kind of retarded argument is that?
Sorry, I meant that the judge hasn't charged him with anything. But yes, you are right. I don't think there is much chance of Think Secret winning this case. And I have to say, he did have it comming. I don't think he needs to be made to pay for damages though.
The judge is right. Since when is knowing if the next iPod mini will have a colour screen any of the public's business? AFAIK, the majority of what Think Secret reports are not to do with Apple knowingly shipping faulty goods or anything of such nature. Your very long, well written post entirly misses the point.
It has even been quoted in one of the first few comments.
This isn't a case of whistle-blowing--where Apple has done something that the public should know about. I suspect you'd get the same results in Brazil.
Besides, AFAIK, he isn't being procecuted or silenced. He's been asked to reveal his sources, because there is good reason to believe they are breaking the law by revealing the info to him.
What do NDAs have to do with the DMCA; a very controversial piece of law. Are you saying that NDAs are as bad as the DMCA, that they have major abuse potential, that all NDAs should be abolished?
AFAIK, Think Secret haven't broken any laws, or atleast, they are not being charged with anything. All that has happened is that they must give their sources.
If someone tells you something that they shouldn't have told you (because they would be violating their NDA), but fails to tell you that they are violating their NDA, does that make you a criminal for reporting it?
Not sure, but it hardly matters, because once you had be informed that they may have been violating their NDA, then, although you might not have commited a crime, you must cooperate with the investigation. And in this case, that means disclosing his sources.
Look at it this way. If you had bought something from someone, and had then been told by someone that they were stolen goods, you would then be breaking the law if you refused to tell the police who you bought it from, but not for actually buying the goods.
IANAL
Well, obviously, this is the whole point in having the court, isn't it? To find out these things. It's not as if there isn't sufficeint evidence to presume that someone has broken an NDA, is it?
If I was spending a lot of money, yes. But what kind of idiot rings up everytime to confirm prices when simply going to a resturant?
Do you see the point? They're not buying a house here, they're going to a resturant.
1> You are selling stuff from your website
2> Someone calls to your attention that said site is out of date.
Even then. I think you'd only risk a fine depending on the type of business. In terms of the resturant, the commitment is pretty much made once you look at the menu on the site and decide to go there. Once you've taken the time to drive there and get seated, then most people would consider it a hassle to find another place to dine at once they discover the prices are incorrect, because it's only a meal. Therefore they just stay, but feel tricked.
If you were selling cars OTOH, you might not get fined, because if someone takes the time to drive down there and have a look at the cars, they're not really expected to commit to buying a car in the first place.
BTW. NZ$3000 is probably around US$1700. A slap on the wrist, really.
Slashdot: Proof that nerds aren't more intelligent than the average person.
Apple is not a software company!
It's a computer company.
If what you are doing has a precise purpose and goal, then it falls into the relms of design/science/engineering/etc.
Eliminating competition by outlawing it, is statism, not socialism. And capitalists will obviously use the state to their benefit if they can, due to the competitive nature of capitalism. Capitalism will only innovate when it is the easiest way to compete. There is nothing about capitalism that makes it an inherently innovative system.
The proof of this should be quite obvious if you look at the US; laws such as the DMCA, and all the things going on with the RIAA etc.